Sago v. Steele

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner Kevin Sago's Motion for Appointment of Counsel # 7 is DENIED without prejudice.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to mail Petitioner Kevin Sago a copy of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 5/10/17. (Note: Copy of Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts sent to Petitioner.)(ARL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

KEVIN L. SAGO,
Petitioner,
v.
TROY STEELE,

Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:17 CV 1097 RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Petitioner Kevin Sago moves for appointment of counsel in this 28
U.S.C. § 2254 case. In support, Sago states that he does not have access to the
Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases because his institution’s library does not
have a copy of these Rules and that he is currently only allowed six hours of
law library time weekly.
Sago does not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed
counsel in these proceedings. McCall v. Benson, 114 F.3d 754, 756 (8th Cir.
1997). In determining whether to appoint counsel, courts consider several
factors, including the factual and legal complexity of the case and the ability of
the plaintiff to investigate the facts and present his claim without the assistance
of court-appointed counsel. Martin v. Fayram, 849 F.3d 691, 699 (8th Cir.

2017). After considering these factors, I find appointment of counsel is not
warranted at this time. The factual and legal issues raised by Sago’s petition are
not so complex and numerous as to warrant appointment of counsel. Sago has
demonstrated an ability to investigate and articulate his claims. He has not
identified any issues that lead me to conclude counsel should be appointed at
this time.
I will deny the motion without prejudice to Sago renewing the motion if
later circumstances warrant it. I will also direct the Clerk of Court to mail Sago
a copy of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, as Sago requested. 
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner Kevin Sago’s Motion for
Appointment of Counsel #[7] is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to
mail Petitioner Kevin Sago a copy of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases
in the United States District Courts.

_________________________________
RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 10th day of May, 2017.

2